这里已经有很多答案了，但我很惊讶似乎没有人建议使用数组……这就是我所做的——这可能在将来对一些人有用。

n=10 # run 10 jobs
c=0
PIDS=()

while true

    my_function_or_command &
    PID=$!
    echo "Launched job as PID=$PID"
    PIDS+=($PID)

    (( c+=1 ))

    # required to prevent any exit due to error
    # caused by additional commands run which you
    # may add when modifying this example
    true

do

    if (( c < n ))
    then
        continue
    else
        break
    fi
done 


# collect launched jobs

for pid in "${PIDS[@]}"
do
    wait $pid || echo "failed job PID=$pid"
done

陷阱是你的朋友。在很多系统中都可能出现ERR。您可以捕获EXIT，或在DEBUG上在每个命令之后执行一段代码。

这除了所有的标准信号。

edit

这是一次意外的登录错误的帐户，所以我没有看到示例的请求。

试试这里，用我的普通账户。

在bash脚本中处理异常

我需要这个，但目标进程不是当前shell的子进程，在这种情况下，等待$PID不起作用。我确实找到了以下替代方案:

while [ -e /proc/$PID ]; do sleep 0.1 ; done

这依赖于procfs的存在，它可能不可用(例如Mac不提供它)。所以对于可移植性，你可以用这个代替:

while ps -p $PID >/dev/null ; do sleep 0.1 ; done

只需将结果存储在shell之外，例如在一个文件中。

#!/bin/bash
tmp=/tmp/results

: > $tmp  #clean the file

for i in `seq 0 9`; do
  (doCalculations $i; echo $i:$?>>$tmp)&
done      #iterate

wait      #wait until all ready

sort $tmp | grep -v ':0'  #... handle as required

为了将此并行化…

for i in $(whatever_list) ; do
   do_something $i
done

翻译成这样…

for i in $(whatever_list) ; do echo $i ; done | ## execute in parallel...
   (
   export -f do_something ## export functions (if needed)
   export PATH ## export any variables that are required
   xargs -I{} --max-procs 0 bash -c ' ## process in batches...
      {
      echo "processing {}" ## optional
      do_something {}
      }' 
   )

If an error occurs in one process, it won't interrupt the other processes, but it will result in a non-zero exit code from the sequence as a whole. Exporting functions and variables may or may not be necessary, in any particular case. You can set --max-procs based on how much parallelism you want (0 means "all at once"). GNU Parallel offers some additional features when used in place of xargs -- but it isn't always installed by default. The for loop isn't strictly necessary in this example since echo $i is basically just regenerating the output of $(whatever_list). I just think the use of the for keyword makes it a little easier to see what is going on. Bash string handling can be confusing -- I have found that using single quotes works best for wrapping non-trivial scripts. You can easily interrupt the entire operation (using ^C or similar), unlike the the more direct approach to Bash parallelism.

下面是一个简化的工作示例……

for i in {0..5} ; do echo $i ; done |xargs -I{} --max-procs 2 bash -c '
   {
   echo sleep {}
   sleep 2s
   }'

我最近用过这个(感谢Alnitak):

#!/bin/bash
# activate child monitoring
set -o monitor

# locking subprocess
(while true; do sleep 0.001; done) &
pid=$!

# count, and kill when all done
c=0
function kill_on_count() {
    # you could kill on whatever criterion you wish for
    # I just counted to simulate bash's wait with no args
    [ $c -eq 9 ] && kill $pid
    c=$((c+1))
    echo -n '.' # async feedback (but you don't know which one)
}
trap "kill_on_count" CHLD

function save_status() {
    local i=$1;
    local rc=$2;
    # do whatever, and here you know which one stopped
    # but remember, you're called from a subshell
    # so vars have their values at fork time
}

# care must be taken not to spawn more than one child per loop
# e.g don't use `seq 0 9` here!
for i in {0..9}; do
    (doCalculations $i; save_status $i $?) &
done

# wait for locking subprocess to be killed
wait $pid
echo

从这里，我们可以很容易地推断，并拥有一个触发器(触摸文件，发送信号)并改变计数标准(计数触摸的文件，或其他)以响应该触发器。或者如果你只是想要'any'非零rc，只需从save_status中杀死锁。